research-article

Configuring Software Product Line Specific Products with SMarty and PLUS: An Experimental Study on Use Case Diagrams

Authors:

Thais S. Nepomuceno,

Edson Oliveira, Jr.Authors Info & Claims

SBQS '18: Proceedings of the XVII Brazilian Symposium on Software Quality

Pages 81 - 90

https://doi.org/10.1145/3275245.3275254

Published: 17 October 2018 Publication History

Abstract

Software Product Line (SPL) represents a set of systems that share common and variable elements, to meet the specific needs of a particular market segment, providing the necessary flexibility for product customization and diversification. The adoption of SPL provides several benefits, such as, the decreasing in time for building a system and reducing its cost. One of the main SPL development activities is variability management. To manage variabilities, there are several approaches widely known in literature, such as, PLUS and SMarty. Literature has no reports of experimental evaluations comparing existing approaches. With the creation of the SMarty approach, a continuous experimental evaluation process was started in relation to other approaches with the same purpose. Thus, experimental studies have been developed in recent years to demonstrate the effectiveness of SMarty in relation to other similar approaches. Thus, in this paper, we continue the process of continuous experimentation and evolution of SMarty comparing it with the PLUS method with regard to the ability to configure SPL specifics products from use case diagrams. The results did not point to the advantages of the SMarty approach over PLUS, but point out discussion points and improvements for SMarty and the experimentation process followed.

References

[1]

A. Ahnassay, D. Bagheri and D. Gasevic, (2014). Empirical evaluation in software product line engineering. Tech. Rep. TR-LS3-130084R4T, Ryerson University, Laboratory for Systems, Software and Semantics. http://ls3.rnet.ryerson.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/TR-LS3130084R4T.pdf

[2]

F. Bachmann and P. Clements, Variability in Software Product Lines, Software Engineering Institute, Pittsburgh, USA, Technical Report CMU/SEI-2005-TR-012, 2005.ftp://itin.sei.cmu.edu/pub/documents/05.reports/pdf/05tr012.pdf

[3]

J. Bosch, G. Florijn, D. Greefhorst, J. Kuusela, J. Obbink, andK. Pohl, "Variability Issues in Software Product Lines," in Softw Product-Family Eng (PFE-4): Springer, 2002, p.303--338.

[4]

J. Bosch. Preface. Proceedings of the Groningen Workshop on software Variability Management: Software Product Families and Populations, (PFP'04), pp: 1--2. 2004.

[5]

R. Capilla; J. Bosch; K. Kang. Systems and Software Variability Management: Concepts, Tools and Experiences. SpringerLink: Bucher. Springer, 2013.

Digital Library

[6]

L. Chen and M. A. Babar. A systematic review of evaluation of variability management approaches in software product lines. Inform. Software Technol., 53: 344--362. 2011.

Digital Library

[7]

F. Fagerholm, A. S. Guinea, H. Maenpaa and J. Munch. Building Blocks for Continuous Experimentation. Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Rapid Continuous Software Engineering. Hyderabad, p. 26--35. 2014.

Digital Library

[8]

Falessi, N. Juristo; C. Wohlin, B. Turhan; J. Munch, A. Jedlitschkaand M. Oivo. Empirical Software Engineering Experts on the Use of Students and Professionals in Experiments. Springer, 2017.

[9]

H. Ferreira; T. F. Naves, (2011) Reuso de software: Suas vantagens, técnicas e prâticas. In: IX - ENACOMP, 2011, Catação. Anais eletrônicos.

[10]

M. Galster; D. Weyns; B. Michalik and P. Avgeriou. Variability in software systems - a systematic literature review. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. p. 282--306. 2013.

Digital Library

[11]

H. Gomaa. Designing Software Product Lines with UML: From Use Cases to Pattern-Based Software Architectures. Redwood City, CA, USA: Addison Wesley, 2004.

Digital Library

[12]

ISO/IEC, 2004. Software engineering-product quality- Part 4: Quality in use metrics. ISO/IEC. https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/11787

[13]

P. Istoan; G. Nain; G. Perrouin and J M Jézéquel (2009). Dynamic Software Product Lines for Service-Based Systems. Proceedings of the IEEE 9th International Conference on Computer and Information Technology.

Digital Library

[14]

C. W. Krueger (1992).Software reuse. Acm Computing Surveys, {s.l.}, v. 24, n. 2, p.131--183, 1992. ACM.

Digital Library

[15]

F. Linden; K. Schmid; E. Rommes (2007). Software Product Lines in Action: The Best Industrial Practice in Product Line Engineering. Springer, 340 p.

Digital Library

[16]

A. S. Marcolino; E. OliveiraJr; I. M. S. Gimenes and J. C. Maldonado. Towards the effectiveness of a variability management approach at use case level. Proceedings of the International Conferences on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, (SEKE'13), pp: 214--219. 2013.

[17]

A. Marcolino, E. OliveiraJr and I. M. Gimenes. Variability identification and representation in software product line UML sequence diagrams: Proposal and empirical study. In Brazilian Symp. on Soft.Eng., p. 141--150. 2014a.

Digital Library

[18]

A. Marcolino, E. OliveiraJr, I. M. Gimenes and E. F. Barbosa. Empirically based evolution of a variability management approach at UML class level. In Annual Comp. Soft. and Applications Conf. COMPSAC, pages 354--363. 2014b.

Digital Library

[19]

A. S. Marcolino; E. OliveiraJr. Avaliação Experimental da Abordagem SMarty para Gerenciamento de Variabilidades em Linhas de Produto de Software Baseadas em UML. In: Simpósio Brasileiro de Qualidade de Software, 2015. v. 1. p. 339--353.

[20]

A. S. Marcolino; E. OliveiraJr; I. M. S. Gimenes; E. F. Barbosa. Variability Resolution and Product Configuration with SMarty: An Experimental Study on UML Class Diagrams. Journal of Computer Science. v. 13, p. 307--319. ago. 2017.

[21]

T. Martinez-Ruiz; F. Garcia; M. Piattini and J. Munch. Modelling software process variability: an empirical study. IET Software, 5: 172--187, 2011.

[22]

Myriam Munezero; Sezin Yaman; Fabian Fagerholm; Petri Kettunen; Hanna Mäenpää; Simo Mäkinen; Juha Tiihonen; Leah Riungu-Kalliosaari; Antti-Pekka Tuovinen; Markku Oivo; Jürgen Münch; Tomi Männistö. Continuous Experimentation Cookbook: an introduction to systematic experimentation for software-intensive businesses. Helsinki, Finland: Dimecc, 2017.

[23]

L. M. Northrop. SEI's software product line tenets. IEEE Software, {s.l.}, v. 19, n. 4, p.32--40, jul. 2002. IEEE.

Digital Library

[24]

E. OliveiraJr; I. M. S. Gimenes; J. C. Maldonado; P. C. Masiero; L. Barroca. Systematic Evaluation of Software Product Line Architectures. Journal of Universal Computer Science, v. 19, p. 25--52, 2013.

[25]

E. OliveiraJr; I. M. S. Gimenes; J. C. Maldonado. Systematic Management of Variability in UML-based Software Product Lines. Journal of Universal Computer Science. São Paulo, p. 2374--2393. 01 set. 2010.

[26]

K. Pohl; G. Bockle; F. Linden (2005). Software Product Line Engineering: Foundations, Principles and Techniques. Springer, 2005. 473 p.

[27]

O. Rissanen and J. Münch. Continuous experimentation in the B2B domain: a case study. Proceedings of The Second International Workshop On Rapid Continuous Software Engineering. Florence, p. 12--18. maio 2015.

Digital Library

[28]

K. Schmid and I. John, A customizable approach to full lifecycle variability management, Sci. Comput. Program., vol. 53, pp. 259--284, 2004.

Digital Library

[29]

SEI Software Engineering Institute. Software Product Lines, 2014. Disponível em: <http://www.sei.cmu.edu/productlines/>. Acesso em: 05 nov. 2017.

[30]

Sommerville, Ian. Engenharia de Software. 9. ed. São Paulo: Pearson Education do Brasil, 2011. 548 p.

[31]

C. Spearman, 1987. The prof and meansurent of association between two things. Am. J. Psycol., 100:441--471.

[32]

J. Van Gurp; J. Bosch; M. Svahnberg (2001). On the notion of variability in software product lines. Proceedings Working IEEE/IFIP Conference On Software Architecture, Amsterdam.

Digital Library

[33]

C. Wohlin; M. Hst; M. C. Ohlsson; B. Regnell and A. Wessln. Experimentation in Software Engineering. Springer Publishing Company, 2012. 259 p.

[34]

S. G. Yaman, M. Munezero, J. Munch and T. Mannisto. Introducing Continuous Experimentation in Large Software-Intensive Product and Service Organizations. The Journal of Systems and Software. p. 195--211. 2017.

[35]

T. Ziadi; L. Helouet; J. Jezequel. Towards a UML Profile for Software Product Lines. In: Product Family Engineering Conference, Springer, 2003, p. 129--139.

[36]

T. Ziadi; J. M. Jezequel Software Product Line Engineering with the UML: Deriving Products. In: Kakola, T.; Duenas, J., eds. Software Product Lines, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, p. 557--588, 2006.

[37]

A. S. Marcolino; E. OliveiraJr. Comparing SMarty and PLUS for Variability Identification and Representation at Product-Line UML Class Level: A Controlled Quasi-Experiment. J. of Computer Science. v.13, p. 617--632. 2017.

[38]

T. Ziadi; L. Helouet; J. Jezequel. Towards a UML Profile for Software Product Lines. In: Product Family Engineering Conference, Springer, 2003, p. 129--139.

[39]

J. F. Bastos; P. A. M. Silveira Neto; Pádraig O'Leary; E. S. Almeida; S. R. Lemos Meira. Software Product Lines Adoption in Small Organizations. The Journal of Systems and Software, p. 112--128. 2017.

Digital Library

[40]

J. Martinez; T. Ziadi; T. Bissyandé; J. Klein; Y. L. Traon. Bottom-Up Technologies for Reuse: Automated Extractive Adoption of Software Product Lines. In: International Conference on Software Engineering. 2017, p. 67--70.

Digital Library

Cited By

Marcolino ANepomuceno TScatalon LOliveiraJr E(2022)Experimentally Based Evaluations of the SMarty ApproachUML-Based Software Product Line Engineering with SMarty10.1007/978-3-031-18556-4_20(445-509)Online publication date: 28-Sep-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-18556-4_20
Nepomuceno TOliveiraJr EGeraldi RMalucelli AReinehr SSilva M(2020)Software Product Line Configuration and Traceability: An Empirical Study on SMarty Class and Component Diagrams2020 IEEE 44th Annual Computers, Software, and Applications Conference (COMPSAC)10.1109/COMPSAC48688.2020.0-144(979-984)Online publication date: Jul-2020
https://doi.org/10.1109/COMPSAC48688.2020.0-144

Index Terms

Configuring Software Product Line Specific Products with SMarty and PLUS: An Experimental Study on Use Case Diagrams
1. Software and its engineering
  1. Software creation and management
    1. Software development techniques
      1. Reusability
        Software product lines

Recommendations

Variability Identification and Representation in Software Product Line UML Sequence Diagrams: Proposal and Empirical Study
ARES '14: Proceedings of the 2014 Ninth International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security

Variability management is an essential activity to ensure which products can be instantiated from the core assets of Software Product lines (SPLs). Stereotype-based Management of Variability (SMarty) is one of the several approaches to manage ...
Towards automatic derivation of a product performance model from a UML software product line model
WOSP '08: Proceedings of the 7th international workshop on Software and performance

Software Product Line (SPL) engineering is a software development approach that takes advantage of the commonality and variability between products from a family, and supports the generation of specific products by reusing a set of core family assets. ...
SMartyParser: a XMI parser for UML-based software product line variability models
VaMoS '13: Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Variability Modelling of Software-Intensive Systems

Variability management is an important issue for the software-intensive systems domain. Such an issue is essential for the success of software product line (SPL) adoption strategies. Although it is a well-discussed subject in the SPL community, there is ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences

SBQS '18: Proceedings of the XVII Brazilian Symposium on Software Quality

October 2018

384 pages

ISBN:9781450365659

DOI:10.1145/3275245

General Chairs:
Andreia Malucelli
PUCPR
,
Sheila Reinehr
PUCPR

Copyright © 2018 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

In-Cooperation

SBC: Brazilian Computer Society

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 17 October 2018

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Research
Refereed limited

Conference

SBQS

SBQS: 17th Brazilian Symposium on Software Quality

October 17 - 19, 2018

Curitiba, Brazil

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 35 of 99 submissions, 35%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

2
Total Citations
View Citations
111
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)6
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 26 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Marcolino ANepomuceno TScatalon LOliveiraJr E(2022)Experimentally Based Evaluations of the SMarty ApproachUML-Based Software Product Line Engineering with SMarty10.1007/978-3-031-18556-4_20(445-509)Online publication date: 28-Sep-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-18556-4_20
Nepomuceno TOliveiraJr EGeraldi RMalucelli AReinehr SSilva M(2020)Software Product Line Configuration and Traceability: An Empirical Study on SMarty Class and Component Diagrams2020 IEEE 44th Annual Computers, Software, and Applications Conference (COMPSAC)10.1109/COMPSAC48688.2020.0-144(979-984)Online publication date: Jul-2020
https://doi.org/10.1109/COMPSAC48688.2020.0-144

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten